A Few Words About A few words about...™ Ghosts of the Abyss -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

The sticker on the front cover of Disney's Ghosts of the Abyss 3D, states that it has been digitally restored, which pleases me, as word was that lab techs inadvertently unspooled several reels of the film, after which visitors walked on it. One reel was apparently located in a men's room. This is precisely the same problem that befall their film about the cute, little underwater princess or whatever. But that apparently occurred at Technicolor. These are the same lab techs that dared one another to light up next to a nitrate original negative.

Mr. Cameron has been on a roll. And Ghosts of the Abyss is obviously the perfect companion piece to Paramount's Titanic, which arrives on September 10, one day before Ghosts.

Following the dive, and seeing the actual ship is an astounding experience, made even more so in 3D.

Not a great deal to be said here.

Beautifully produced documentary of a extremely interesting subject, brought to Blu-ray (thank goodness in a restored form).

Easy.

Great documentary. Beautiful Blu-ray. And the perfect companion disc to Titanic.

Image - 4.5 (only as it's restored)

Audio - 5

A bit pricy at its $30 street price of admission, but both versions are included. The 3D is the original 60 minute cut, while the 2D is extended by 30 minutes.

Highly Recommended.

BTW, I would not have been able to give this film a recommendation, had it not been digitally restored. Have I made my point?

RAH

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Received a copy of this in 3D and hope to review it here tomorrow.

You have given me something to look forward to. Thanks, RAH

 

[Felix Martinez]

I'm a big fan of this film, even moreso now that it's restored.

Can't wait to see this with my son, who a few years ago demonstrated his fascination with the Titanic story - and earned a signed poster of the ship by Ken Marschall (which also may have been a restored print).

 

[Matt Hough]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein /t/323418/a-few-words-about-ghosts-of-the-abyss-in-blu-ray#post_3969086
Received a copy of this in 3D and hope to review it here tomorrow.

You have given me something to look forward to. Thanks, RAH

I'll also be reviewing this in its 3D incarnation, but as it has a September 11th street date, it has a few other discs ahead of it in my queue.

 

[Richard--W]

The stereoscopic lensing was fraught with problems during principle photography and not a lot of it got used. It held up best in the Imax version which also emphasized the flaws. I hope the mis-aligned footage has been corrected for the Blu-ray.
RAH which version did you watch, the 3-D or the 2-d?

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Thank goodness I don't have to boycott this title over lack of restoration!
As with all titles released in the last 15 years:
NO RESTORATION = NO SALE

 

[Fritz Nilsen]

Guys, stop it!
My sarcasm alarm is going off all over the place and waking up the kids

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Richard--W /t/323418/a-few-words-about-ghosts-of-the-abyss-in-blu-ray#post_3969123
The stereoscopic lensing was fraught with problems during principle photography and not a lot of it got used. It held up best in the Imax version which also emphasized the flaws. I hope the mis-aligned footage has been corrected for the Blu-ray.
RAH which version did you watch, the 3-D or the 2-d?

I screened the shorter 3D version. The 3D works well when the shots can use it. As I recall from watching a few baseball games in 3D, the realization doesn't take long to hit you that unless you have a foreground and a background, and there is distance between them, there isn't much to 3D.

 

[JamesNelson]

IMHO, really good 3-D, like really good surround sound, should be subtle, lending realism to the experience, but not to the point of distraction or calling too much attention to itself. Whiz-bang moments should be reserved for appropriate times and places where additional dramatic impact serves the story. The viewer should not be constantly aware of the technology.

 

[Richard--W]

I screened the shorter 3D version.  The 3D works well when the shots can use it.  As I recall from watching a few baseball games in 3D, the realization doesn't take long to hit you that unless you have a foreground and a background, and there is distance between them, there isn't much to 3D.

One needs a foreground and a background with distance between them in 2-d as well. In portraiture the foreground can be the forehead and the background can be the eyes. In 3-D depth depends in part on the focal length and the stereo window.
I don't share the interest many people have in the Titanic, but the logistics of what Cameron did is astonishing. To my eye the 3-D is poorly shot and could have been infinitely better. I say this without having seen the Blu-ray.